Bama fatique killing college football???

[WhosYourDawggy]

I didn't read thru 5 pages of comments/posts.....


I say allow the super-elite recruits to go pro immediately out of high school.... primarily in Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's XFL and the CFL for one or two years of seasoning before moving on to the NFL. There are probably plenty of elite high school recruits who have no interest in academics/a college degree..... they just want to play football.

Each year there are probably 2 or 3 recruits who might possibly be NFL ready immediately out of high school..... and perhaps another 10 to 12 recruits who would only need one year of seasoning in the XFL or CFL..... and perhaps another 12 to 15 who would need two years of seasoning in the XFL or CFL.

Allowing these approx. 20 to 30 super-elite kids each year to turn pro immediately out of high school instead of being distributed amongst the generally same 7 or 8 elite college programs will somewhat contribute to evening the talent level discrepancy which exists in the power 5 conferences.

UGA has had the top class, or in the top 3 the past 4 years. We've not had a single player that was ready for the NFL right out of high school. That's about 20 5* players. Andrew Thomas, our LT might have been the closest, and he struggled the first half of this year in the NFL. These kids all need the S&C programs to be ready to play against grown ass men in the NFL. And, that's an NFL decision, not a CFB decision, and they have no interest in a development league and the costs that would entail.

Even if that weren't the case, the next 20 would be drawn to the same teams for the same reasons. So, that next level would just move up. The plan has to be something that will make it more attractive to stay home, go to schools for more immediate PT, that type of thing. Expanded playoffs, free agency, and NIL payments are going to be what disrupts what we have now ... no idea if it works.

 

[Innermind]

These kids all need the S&C programs to be ready to play against grown ass men in the NFL. And, that's an NFL decision, not a CFB decision, and they have no interest in a development league and the costs that would entail.

Exactly.... that's why I emphasized the XFL and CFL in my post..... those are your two development leagues for one or two years of seasoning/development prior to going to the NFL as I already mentioned.

Even if that weren't the case, the next 20 would be drawn to the same teams for the same reasons. So, that next level would just move up.

Yes, the next 20 to 30 available kids would move up to the same 7 or 8 schools.... BUT.... those next 20 to 30 kids would NOT be at the same super-elite level as the 20 to 30 at the very top..... thus, the talent gap will not be as wide.... sure there will always be a talent gap between the top 7 or 8 schools and the remainder of the power 5, but my point is that the talent gap severity will somewhat be reduced by allowing the super-elite recruits to get seasoned/developed for a year or two in the XFL or CFL.... especially for those kids who have NO INTEREST in academics/pursuing a degree.

The CFL and XFL currently get scraps & rejects.... I'm sure they would welcome elite talent even if it's for only one or two seasons because those teams know they would be able to welcome a new crop of young talent every year.

And again.... the elite kids whom have NO INTEREST in academics will be able to earn some money playing pro football at the same time as becoming seasoned/developed for one or two years in preparation for eventually moving on to the NFL.

It's certainly not a panacea, but I'm convinced it would help to somewhat reduce the talent gap.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Exactly.... that's why I emphasized the XFL and CFL in my post..... those are your two development leagues for one or two years of seasoning/development prior to going to the NFL as I already mentioned.






Yes, the next 20 to 30 available kids would move up to the same 7 or 8 schools.... BUT.... those next 20 to 30 kids would NOT be at the same super-elite level as the 20 to 30 at the very top..... thus, the talent gap will not be as wide.... sure there will always be a talent gap between the top 7 or 8 schools and the remainder of the power 5, but my point is that the talent gap severity will somewhat be reduced by allowing the super-elite recruits to get seasoned/developed for a year or two in the XFL or CFL.... especially for those kids who have NO INTEREST in academics/pursuing a degree.

The CFL and XFL currently get scraps & rejects.... I'm sure they would welcome elite talent even if it's for only one or two seasons because those teams know they would be able to welcome a new crop of young talent every year.

And again.... the elite kids whom have NO INTEREST in academics will be able to earn some money playing pro football at the same time as becoming seasoned/developed for one or two years in preparation for eventually moving on to the NFL.

It's certainly not a panacea, but I'm convinced it would help to somewhat reduce the talent gap.

We'll have to a agree to disagree ... there are no high school players ready to play in even the XFL and CFL ... still boys among men, they'd get killed. And, 20 - 30 kids just wouldn't make a difference any way.

The NBA is trying this, but look at how few players are able to do it, and it's more likely that you can do that in basketball. I've actually argued this to get rid of the one and done in hoops, so I get your idea. But, the NBA is having a hard time to do it and there is a big difference between the sports. They are thinking about adding a single development team in the G League, and I think that's the ultimate answer. Something like that is your best bet, but I don't see that making a meaningful dent in CFB.

Finally, there is no financial incentive ... only a small percent make it, and the others need that degree. Those that will get to the NFL aren't going to take a little money from the XFL or CFL when they have a shot at millions going the college route.

Having said all that, there will probably be a G League in the NFL in a few years. LOL.

 

[Belcherboy]

I don't see it that way. The ones that are going to get totally screwed are the G5 who find a diamond in the rough who then moves onto the P5. See, Buffalo's star RB who is in the portal. The G5 will rue the day that legislation gets passed. Any P5 that go to play in the G5 didn't pan out, or were attitude problems, with a few exceptions here and there.

The Top Tier recruiters will certainly lose some 5*, but mostly because they turned out not to be 5*. This is the most common scenario. UF took Shorter and Lingard, both 5*. Neither had played well at their previous schools. Neither started at UF, Lingard is talking about changing positions. Cox was a 5* who went from UGA to UF, and while he played at UGA wouldn't have been a starter, and had some attitude issues. To his and UF's credit, he appears to have matured at UF, and while he wasn't a star, he played well enough. For the most part, the top players moving didn't pan out.

The real winners will be:
(1) crappy recruiters like Mullen, who will fill in with transfers;
(2) the 7-20 level recruiting teams who can fill rosters with cast offs from lower and higher teams looking for PT
(3) and the top recruiting teams who will get to fill their gaps with proven players.

The top winners are the players who get to do what the coaches do ... move on when things don't work out or have a better shot elsewhere.

The G5's, in my opinion, have the most to gain. Most programs rarely get that "diamond in the rough", but when a highly rated recruit leaves a top program (and being immediately eligible will create more movement), it can be program changing. That is what happened at Liberty this past year. Malik Willis leaves Auburn and turns them into a top 25 team, when they never even sniffed a ranking in the history of the program.

I could see things like a G5 losing a big time player happening occasionally, but I think we would see a big recruit who gets lost in a big program, leaving and blowing up in a smaller program happen more often than the opposite happening.

 

[TaikoTiger]

I believe they will go to 12 as it makes the most sense with byes, etc. It checks all the boxes and 8 doesn't. That said, they've been incremental in the past, so we will see.

Your numbers are way off, and I don't think you fully understand the economics of bowls. You've been around here a long time, and I know you are knowledgeable, but NY6 bowls that are part of the CFP would vastly out pull them not part of the CFP:

This year's semis pulled 18.9 and 19.1.
The Peach Bowl with UGA Cincy pulled 8.72 million. That's less than half, which is significant.
The Orange Bowl pulled 7.58 million,
The Fiesta 6.68 and
The Cotton 5.7.

Hell those last 3 combined were less than the two semis. The two semis: 38 million, the 4 NY6 were 28 million. Now make them quarter-final games and you are increasing your viewership by what, at least 40 million viewers. With 12 teams you get 4 games at home schools fields, which will draw more than 15 million viewers.

As for non-CFP bowls:

New Year’s Eve Army-West Virginia Liberty Bowl - 3.74 million — up 12% from last year
The Mississippi State-Tulsa Armed Forces Bowl drew 2.25 million earlier in the day (+29%).
The Wake Forest-Wisconsin Charlotte Bowl averaged 1.98 million early last Wednesday (-25%).

As for ESPN being concerned, I know they are going to have to tighten up, but CFB isn't where it's going to happen. Look at what they just paid for the SEC to take them away from CBS ... no problem spending money there. No fuck you for wanting hundreds of millions more, no they gave them billions more.

Read up on the whole bowl system. I did and it was totally not what I expected. Because of the sheer volume, and the popularity of CFB they make a shit ton of money. Far from dying off, they are this ATM for ESPN and the cities that host them. There is a reason that they keep adding them (obviously not in Covid year). ESPN isn't worried about the Bahamas bowl getting 10 million viewers. But when 18 bowls each get 1-3 million, you make shit ton of money.

Bowl Game Payouts are Practically a Small Fortune in College Football

Despite the serious bowl problem of players skipping out on their team one game early, the college football bowl season is the most important stretch of games for so many colleges and universities. Not only is this a chance for smaller schools to receive national attention, but the payday that...

fanbuzz.com

College Football Playoff business is booming at halfway point, but expansion looms

The College Football Playoff is six years into a 12-year deal that has been a financial smash hit. Expansion could mean even more growth.

www.usatoday.com

Rule no. 1 is always "it's about the money." The money rule here says expand, and getting more involved says so as well.

If you had to guess, how much views would you think the quarter-finals would really bring in? In most years there’s a drop off of about 7 mil views from Finals to semis, would we see a similar drop off between Semis and Qtrs? My concern is that we’re trading in evenly match NY6 games for QtrFinal matchups with larger spreads, is it better for TV? Hard to say

 

[UNA Lion]

Hate to say it, but in hindsight the BC$ appears to have got it right more than the playoffs, and drew more viewers in the process.

 

[TaikoTiger]

I didn't read thru 5 pages of comments/posts.....


I say allow the super-elite recruits to go pro immediately out of high school.... primarily in Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's XFL and the CFL for one or two years of seasoning before moving on to the NFL. There are probably plenty of elite high school recruits who have no interest in academics/a college degree..... they just want to play football.

Each year there are probably 2 or 3 recruits who might possibly be NFL ready immediately out of high school..... and perhaps another 10 to 12 recruits who would only need one year of seasoning in the XFL or CFL..... and perhaps another 12 to 15 who would need two years of seasoning in the XFL or CFL.

Allowing these approx. 20 to 30 super-elite kids each year to turn pro immediately out of high school instead of being distributed amongst the generally same 7 or 8 elite college programs will somewhat contribute to evening the talent level discrepancy which exists in the power 5 conferences.

Only a handful of HS kids would ever see the field in the XFL as they going against former CFB players and NFL free agents. Then the kid have to decide between a quick cash grab vs going to their choice of NFL farm. XFL is competing against schools who have better facilities, coaching staff, track record in getting players to the pros and exposure.

Now if the NFL decrease the amount of years it takes to get into the NFL, then I can see that decreasing the talent gap in CFB but I think that does more harm to the sport then good. Keeping star players around like Zion, Lawrence, and Fields are huge for ratings

 

[Wild Turkey]

Hate to say it, but in hindsight the BC$ appears to have got it right more than the playoffs, and drew more viewers in the process.

There is no possible way to defend your position. In no year during the playoffs has an undefeated P5 team been left out and there is zero legitimate argument that the best team wasn’t in the 4.

The BCS had 2004 with Auburn being left out and 2006 had Florida in over Michigan when their was a lot of debate about.

Every single thing about your comment is just false.

 

[OlyDuck]

Per your argument, you guys are all fantastic and equal, and beat each other so you don't get in. Well, now you do. Maybe next time realize when you have an allie in a post and don't get your panties in a twist.

never said all the teams were fantastic and equal. just that the difference between the teams is closer than other conferences. the Pac has had more variety in division champs than the other conferences.

 

[OlyDuck]

Aww look, he's trying to be cute again.

well your opinion vs what basically every talking head, writer, analyst and expert were saying last year. they were 5th in the final rankings after the Pac 12 title game. 1 less loss and they were pretty much in everyone's 4 spot.

 

[OlyDuck]

Easy now oly. Coulda, shoulda, woulda don't cut it. And, I don't think you want to go down the conference parity road for the Pac right now. The tallest midget is still....a midget!

i would rather have a conference of parity than the same team winning it over and over. at least even with USC Pete run they shared it like 3 times

 

[OlyDuck]

The Pac does get in from time to time, they just can't compete against the big boys. I'm for expanding to 8 teams and hopefully it'll happen some what reasonably soon.

well i mean when Oregon went they beat the previously undefeated over like 2 seasons previous year champs Florida State and were in the championship game in to the early 4th quarter. it was 20-28 untill about 10 min left in the game.
so speak for washington not Oregon

 

[Rolltide94]

I believe they will go to 12 as it makes the most sense with byes, etc. It checks all the boxes and 8 doesn't. That said, they've been incremental in the past, so we will see.

Your numbers are way off, and I don't think you fully understand the economics of bowls. You've been around here a long time, and I know you are knowledgeable, but NY6 bowls that are part of the CFP would vastly out pull them not part of the CFP:

This year's semis pulled 18.9 and 19.1.
The Peach Bowl with UGA Cincy pulled 8.72 million. That's less than half, which is significant.
The Orange Bowl pulled 7.58 million,
The Fiesta 6.68 and
The Cotton 5.7.

Hell those last 3 combined were less than the two semis. The two semis: 38 million, the 4 NY6 were 28 million. Now make them quarter-final games and you are increasing your viewership by what, at least 40 million viewers. With 12 teams you get 4 games at home schools fields, which will draw more than 15 million viewers.

As for non-CFP bowls:

New Year’s Eve Army-West Virginia Liberty Bowl - 3.74 million — up 12% from last year
The Mississippi State-Tulsa Armed Forces Bowl drew 2.25 million earlier in the day (+29%).
The Wake Forest-Wisconsin Charlotte Bowl averaged 1.98 million early last Wednesday (-25%).

As for ESPN being concerned, I know they are going to have to tighten up, but CFB isn't where it's going to happen. Look at what they just paid for the SEC to take them away from CBS ... no problem spending money there. No fuck you for wanting hundreds of millions more, no they gave them billions more.

Read up on the whole bowl system. I did and it was totally not what I expected. Because of the sheer volume, and the popularity of CFB they make a shit ton of money. Far from dying off, they are this ATM for ESPN and the cities that host them. There is a reason that they keep adding them (obviously not in Covid year). ESPN isn't worried about the Bahamas bowl getting 10 million viewers. But when 18 bowls each get 1-3 million, you make shit ton of money.

Bowl Game Payouts are Practically a Small Fortune in College Football

Despite the serious bowl problem of players skipping out on their team one game early, the college football bowl season is the most important stretch of games for so many colleges and universities. Not only is this a chance for smaller schools to receive national attention, but the payday that...

fanbuzz.com

College Football Playoff business is booming at halfway point, but expansion looms

The College Football Playoff is six years into a 12-year deal that has been a financial smash hit. Expansion could mean even more growth.

www.usatoday.com

Rule no. 1 is always "it's about the money." The money rule here says expand, and getting more involved says so as well.

Nice job using the 2020 covid season to try and make a point that doesn't exist. The NY6 bowls this year pulled a fraction of what they have in year's past. Ratings were down across the board. All of the none playoffs games drew the equivalent of 2019's Snoozefest Orange Bowl between Florida and Virginia.

IF you think the NY6 bowls are going to continue at the less than 7 million level, might as well get ready of them all together and go to the playoff now.

Everything in your lol, fanbuzz blog is about revenue, half the bowl teams lost money after expenses. The shit bowls work for ESPN because even the shitty bowls bring more viewers than the 16th showing of Sportscenter. It's the same reason Networks are clogged with reality shows...cheap.

Your second source makes the ballsy assumption that the expanded playoffs will have no impact on the NY6 bowls viewership, which is clearly ridiculous. It's $420 million valuation is based on an increase viewership of 60 million people, what happens to the 28 million that watched the NY6 in the covid year...and why are the revenues going up for what is essentially watered down games...Like I said Alabama vs Cincy is not going to outdraw Alabama vs Notre Dame.

Your second source also clearly states ESPN's position...we'll see what happens after 2026.

Like I said, Unlike the SEC deal, ESPN already has the rights through 2026, why are they going to pay more to show the same games?

 

[Deep Creek]

i would rather have a conference of parity than the same team winning it over and over. at least even with USC Pete run they shared it like 3 times

I would too....as long as all the teams are good. Makes for a more exciting conference race...and comes closer to validating the rallying cry of "every game matters" mantra. Too many conferences don't have close races til the end because of a lack of parity IMO. But I blame the lower ones for not stepping up more than the top dogs for that.

But, parity may not be good if it creates a statement like "I don't know if any of us are good but we are damn sure even."

 

[Deep Creek]

well i mean when Oregon went they beat the previously undefeated over like 2 seasons previous year champs Florida State and were in the championship game in to the early 4th quarter. it was 20-28 untill about 10 min left in the game.
so speak for washington not Oregon

they stomped is a better description IMO.

 

[OlyDuck]

There is no possible way to defend your position. In no year during the playoffs has an undefeated P5 team been left out and there is zero legitimate argument that the best team wasn’t in the 4.

The BCS had 2004 with Auburn being left out and 2006 had Florida in over Michigan when their was a lot of debate about.

Every single thing about your comment is just false.

you forgot 2001.
Miami #1 Oregon was #2 in all polls except the BCS but somehow Nebraska who was #2 in their division and didnt play for their conference title and who lost to Colorado 62-36 in their last game got into the championship game.
Meanwhile Oregon goes on to beat Colorado 38-16 while Nebraska loses to Miami 37-14

 

[Rolltide94]

i would rather have a conference of parity than the same team winning it over and over. at least even with USC Pete run they shared it like 3 times

Speaking of parity, since 2007 Oregon has one less Conference Championship than Alabama.

 

[OlyDuck]

Not very well is a decided understatement...4 wins in like 25 or so games since 2016. I don't believe any of those were top 15 wins either. Good academics though, and water polo and shit.

if you are not counting bowls its not even 20 games and more than 4 wins with a win over at the time top 15 team.

if you count bowls its closer to 35 and of course even more wins (making it much greater than 4 and even more games over top 15 teams.

perception vs reality
what you believe vs what really is
so dont tell me there isnt a bias

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

well your opinion vs what basically every talking head, writer, analyst and expert were saying last year. they were 5th in the final rankings after the Pac 12 title game. 1 less loss and they were pretty much in everyone's 4 spot.

It's adorable when you carry on with delusions of grandeur.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Nice job using the 2020 covid season to try and make a point that doesn't exist. The NY6 bowls this year pulled a fraction of what they have in year's past. Ratings were down across the board. All of the none playoffs games drew the equivalent of 2019's Snoozefest Orange Bowl between Florida and Virginia.

IF you think the NY6 bowls are going to continue at the less than 7 million level, might as well get ready of them all together and go to the playoff now.

Everything in your lol, fanbuzz blog is about revenue, half the bowl teams lost money after expenses. The shit bowls work for ESPN because even the shitty bowls bring more viewers than the 16th showing of Sportscenter. It's the same reason Networks are clogged with reality shows...cheap.

Your second source makes the ballsy assumption that the expanded playoffs will have no impact on the NY6 bowls viewership, which is clearly ridiculous. It's $420 million valuation is based on an increase viewership of 60 million people, what happens to the 28 million that watched the NY6 in the covid year...and why are the revenues going up for what is essentially watered down games...Like I said Alabama vs Cincy is not going to outdraw Alabama vs Notre Dame.

Your second source also clearly states ESPN's position...we'll see what happens after 2026.

Like I said, Unlike the SEC deal, ESPN already has the rights through 2026, why are they going to pay more to show the same games?

I didn't purposefully cherry pick COVID numbers, and it doesn't change things. I looked at the past 4 years, and my point still stands and your assumptions are not supported by the numbers.

- Discounting this year, the non-semi NY6 bowl games regularly pull anywhere from 41-64% of the viewership of the semis. The non-CFP NY6 averaged 9, 11, 9, 11 million in the past 4 years. More than the 7 you wrote, but still plenty of room for growth. The numbers and averages are below.

- In the context of our discussion, it doesn't matter that the teams lose money going to the games, it's an event to reward the players and their parents. And while some indirectly lose money on a bowl game, the pool is huge and they make a ton of money. You also have to factor in community impact which is huge. The year NOLA hosted the Sugar Bowl and the NC game, they estimated a half a billion dollars in community impact. That matters, and it's why the bowls are so powerful and continue to grow (non-Covid years, of course). You may hate them, the average CFB fan seems to like them plenty. And TV and the bowls make a crap load of money and will want to make more.

- We obviously don't know what will happen if they add more CFP games, but the assumption has to be that viewership will go up. Fanbases who don't care will care. There will be some great games, and some blowouts. If you go 12, where you have 5 playing 12, instead of 1 playing 16, then you will have more competitive games. As for Alabama v. Cincy not drawing Alabama v. ND, you would get 2 games not one, and they would combined clearly bring in more viewers. Don't understand that you think less football is more profitable than more football. I've listed a 12 teams CFP for 2019-2020 below ... who wouldn't want to watch a bunch of those games?

- Why would they pay more? To make more money, of course. As the numbers an reasonable assumptions show, they are likely to increase viewership of the other 4 NY6 bowls by 33-50%. Go to 12, and you add 4 more great games that will pull at least 10 million each. Of course they will pay for that.

Here is a 2019-2020 12 game CFP:

(12) Utah @ (5) UGA
(11) Auburn @ (6) Oregon
(10) PSU @ (7) Baylor
(9) UF @ (8) Wisconsin

Reseed for upsets and Bowl matchups - I just went with seeds.
(not sure of the bowl matchup reseed - I did it for a PAC v. B1G Rose Bowl, but you do for upsets for sure like the NFL does)

Sugar - (1) LSU v. (8) Wisconsin
Rose - (2) tOSU v. (7) Oregon
Cotton - (4) OU v. (5) UGA
Orange - (3) Clemson v. (6) Baylor

Here are the NY6 numbers:

2020-21 (Covid)
Rose - 18.9
Sugar - 19.1 - avg 19

Peach - 8.7
Fiesta - 6.7
Cotton - 5.8m
Orange - 7.6m - avg 7.2, 37% of the Semis

2019-20
Peach - 17.2m
Fiesta - 20.4m - avg 18.8

Sugar - 10m
Rose - 16m
Cotton - 6.2m
Orange - 6m - avg 9.55, 50% of the semis


2018-19
Orange - 19.1m
Cotton - 16.9m - avg 18m

Sugar - 13.3
Rose - 16.7
Peach - 8.4
Fiesta - 8.5 - avg. 11.7, 65% of semis

2017-18
Sugar - 21.5m
Rose - 26.9m - avg 24.2

Fiesta - 10.2m
Peach - 8.4m
Cotton - 9.5m
Orange - 11.7m - avg 9.95, 41% of semis

2016-17
Peach - 19.3m
Fiesta - 19.4m - avg 19.35

Orange - 14
Sugar - 9m
Rose - 16m
Cotton - 5.5 - avg 11.1, 57% of semis